|
|
Post by TinyTimPig on Mar 9, 2021 14:22:52 GMT -5
A lot seem to be on board with the idea that these scouting groups are not good for the league.
I would suggest we go back to a method where there is no group scouting, and each GM can instead choose to scout whoever they please prior to the draft timer starting.
If a GM wants to share the info they paid for, they are free to do so, but they will not be compensated for it.
Open to other suggestions for how to manage it, but the whole thing seems to have gotten out of hand.
|
|
Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Mar 9, 2021 14:33:39 GMT -5
there will always be scouting groups whether it's "allowed" or not. better to have it regulated imo.
but i don't care enough either way. I'm good with what the league wants.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ankly on Mar 9, 2021 14:37:53 GMT -5
there will always be scouting groups whether it's "allowed" or not. better to have it regulated imo. but i don't care enough either way. I'm good with what the league wants. If we share information to only select GMs (i.e. the ones who pay for the scouts), there's always going to be sharing of that information via PM. Eliminating the cartels means eliminating the product which is the scouting reports themselves. Now I'm down for some extra information that people can use to make their picks. But I think that information should probably just be public to all. Sharing the literal attributes of these players seems like overkill, and it also introduces the cartel problem. Expanded Hoop Summit seems like the way to go imo. Can be a decent amount of games so that GMs have a good idea of who they are drafting. |
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Mar 9, 2021 14:41:42 GMT -5
I'd prefer we see grades similar to creation draft of a season vs. a set file of "going pro in something else" prospects. Then we scrap scouting altogether and draft based on grades and "college" production relative to the set file (adjusted for the rookies in the class).
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2021 14:42:43 GMT -5
get rid of scouting info trades
|
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Mar 9, 2021 14:48:28 GMT -5
there will always be scouting groups whether it's "allowed" or not. better to have it regulated imo. but i don't care enough either way. I'm good with what the league wants. This is my thought. I have no issue with the scouting groups as it lessons the cost. If we want to remove this then lets discuss reducing the cost of scouts. |
|
|
|
Post by Ankly on Mar 9, 2021 14:49:09 GMT -5
I'd prefer we see grades similar to creation draft of a season vs. a set file of "going pro in something else" prospects. Then we scrap scouting altogether and draft based on grades and "college" production relative to the set file (adjusted for the rookies in the class). ^I think this would be fun with like a half season sim that gets posted with three 20 day increments. Like you get to follow along with the college season during the year. Would also have fun stuff where maybe a guy gets injured and you don't see him play. |
|
Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Mar 9, 2021 14:51:59 GMT -5
We’re all trying to play sim basketball. Ank’s trying to play the Sims.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ankly on Mar 9, 2021 14:53:30 GMT -5
We’re all trying to play sim basketball. Ank’s trying to play the Sims. You don't think it would be fun for the teams at the top to get to peruse "college" box scores for the prospects? That would be fun. And it avoids the cartel issue. |
|
|
|
Post by 20s on Mar 9, 2021 14:56:37 GMT -5
I'd prefer we see grades similar to creation draft of a season vs. a set file of "going pro in something else" prospects. Then we scrap scouting altogether and draft based on grades and "college" production relative to the set file (adjusted for the rookies in the class). I like this idea. |
|
bankz
New Member
GM of the Year: 3001
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 490
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by bankz on Mar 9, 2021 15:00:49 GMT -5
I voted no. Feel the same as Soup that I rather have groups regulated because the info will be shared regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Mar 9, 2021 15:06:59 GMT -5
Limit full scouts
|
|
|
|
Post by Ankly on Mar 9, 2021 15:10:56 GMT -5
The existence of full scouts at all is what creates the scouting groups/cartels (whether they are regulated or not).
If you're giving information that is not public to GMs (e.g. the full scout of a player), that's going to result in scouting groups/cartels because people will share/sell that information.
So I think we make all scouting information public, but we make it something different than the literal build of the player.
|
|
|
|
Post by 20s on Mar 9, 2021 15:14:39 GMT -5
The existence of full scouts at all is what creates the scouting groups/cartels (whether they are regulated or not). If you're giving information that is not public to GMs (e.g. the full scout of a player), that's going to result in scouting groups/cartels because people will share/sell that information. So I think we make all scouting information public, but we make it something different than the literal build of the player. Agree, this: I would suggest we go back to a method where there is no group scouting, and each GM can instead choose to scout whoever they please prior to the draft timer starting. If a GM wants to share the info they paid for, they are free to do so, but they will not be compensated for it. just means I scout Players 1-4, Majic scouts players 5-8, bankz scouts players 9-12 and then we all share in our own PM. Same thing as our scouting group through eric. |
|
|
|
Post by Dirt on Mar 9, 2021 15:33:51 GMT -5
If we change Scouts I'll probably quit but I'm fine getting rid of groups.
|
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Mar 9, 2021 16:26:49 GMT -5
The existence of full scouts at all is what creates the scouting groups/cartels (whether they are regulated or not). If you're giving information that is not public to GMs (e.g. the full scout of a player), that's going to result in scouting groups/cartels because people will share/sell that information. So I think we make all scouting information public, but we make it something different than the literal build of the player. Agree, this: I would suggest we go back to a method where there is no group scouting, and each GM can instead choose to scout whoever they please prior to the draft timer starting. If a GM wants to share the info they paid for, they are free to do so, but they will not be compensated for it. This |
|
|
|
Post by TinyTimPig on Mar 9, 2021 17:05:12 GMT -5
just means I scout Players 1-4, Majic scouts players 5-8, bankz scouts players 9-12 and then we all share in our own PM. Same thing as our scouting group through eric. Maybe this can of worms has been opened, and I'm completely open to that being the case, but it just never happened like this in 5.0. I think part of the reason was that folks would generally hesitate to share info until they had made their picks. If you pick four guys to scout and one guy has a surprisingly strong build and is a hidden gem, I'd think it'd make it less likely you'd want to share that with others. |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Mar 9, 2021 17:07:58 GMT -5
just means I scout Players 1-4, Majic scouts players 5-8, bankz scouts players 9-12 and then we all share in our own PM. Same thing as our scouting group through eric. Maybe this can of worms has been opened, and I'm completely open to that being the case, but it just never happened like this in 5.0. I think part of the reason was that folks would generally hesitate to share info until they had made their picks. If you pick four guys to scout and one guy has a surprisingly strong build and is a hidden gem, I'd think it'd make it less likely you'd want to share that with others. I tend to agree with this as well |
|
|
|
Post by 20s on Mar 9, 2021 17:19:14 GMT -5
just means I scout Players 1-4, Majic scouts players 5-8, bankz scouts players 9-12 and then we all share in our own PM. Same thing as our scouting group through eric. Maybe this can of worms has been opened, and I'm completely open to that being the case, but it just never happened like this in 5.0. I think part of the reason was that folks would generally hesitate to share info until they had made their picks. If you pick four guys to scout and one guy has a surprisingly strong build and is a hidden gem, I'd think it'd make it less likely you'd want to share that with others. This may have some truth, as well. I'd be willing to give it a shot. |
|
|
|
Post by Ankly on Mar 10, 2021 10:53:12 GMT -5
The Yay's have it pretty comfortably
|
|
|
|
Post by Druce on Mar 10, 2021 10:54:15 GMT -5
this is sounding more and more like ethnic cleansing, and i don't like it. getting rid of "groups"?!?!
|
|
|
|
Post by Yawn of the Dead on Mar 10, 2021 11:38:46 GMT -5
Get rid of full attribute scouting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Mar 10, 2021 11:54:57 GMT -5
get rid of scouting
|
|
|
|
Post by 20s on Mar 10, 2021 12:28:21 GMT -5
get rid of attributes
|
|
bankz
New Member
GM of the Year: 3001
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 490
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by bankz on Mar 10, 2021 12:48:51 GMT -5
We have like 30 suggestions. Feels like we need to create a new poll.
|
|
IanBoyd
New Member
Posts: 792
Likes: 252
Joined: December 2020
|
Post by IanBoyd on Mar 10, 2021 12:55:45 GMT -5
We have like 30 suggestions. Feels like we need to create a new poll. make a poll on if u think we should have a new poll on that. |
|
|
|
Post by TinyTimPig on Mar 10, 2021 12:57:05 GMT -5
We have like 30 suggestions. Feels like we need to create a new poll. The two suggestions I see so far are: 1. Get rid of the current concept of scouting groups. People can still share info if they so please and don't want to be compensated for it 2. Get rid of scouting altogether and instead do some sort of summit or expanded "college" stats Option 2 would be a much more drastic switch and not something I'm sure Eric would consider immediately. |
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Mar 10, 2021 13:28:55 GMT -5
We have like 30 suggest 2ons. Feels like we need to create a new poll. The two suggestions I see so far are: 1. Get rid of the current concept of scouting groups. People can still share info if they so please and don't want to be compensated for it 2. Get rid of scouting altogether and instead do some sort of summit or expanded "college" stats Option 2 would be a much more drastic switch and not something I'm sure Eric would consider immediately. 2 |
|
bankz
New Member
GM of the Year: 3001
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 490
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by bankz on Mar 10, 2021 13:35:01 GMT -5
We have like 30 suggestions. Feels like we need to create a new poll. The two suggestions I see so far are: 1. Get rid of the current concept of scouting groups. People can still share info if they so please and don't want to be compensated for it 2. Get rid of scouting altogether and instead do some sort of summit or expanded "college" stats Option 2 would be a much more drastic switch and not something I'm sure Eric would consider immediately. If two became the law I would hope it wouldn't be put in place till after we clear the current classes that picks have been traded for. That would be unfair. |
|
|
|
Post by delap on Mar 10, 2021 13:44:33 GMT -5
I am pro-scouting... including full scouts.
5.0 system worked. If you share, you share... that's your deal
|
|
